Both former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have called for an end to taxes on tips, though many cite that tipped workers are often not subject to federal taxes due to low income. What do you think? https://theonion.com/trump-harris-both-call-for-no-tax-on-tips/

LOL but can we have the link?

So, in short, a new constitutional grounding for an independent Fed, and a call for revitalized judicial review to help reshape the political economy of the Fed’s non-monetary decisions. Read it here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... 12/12

Lastly, we sketch the implications of our theory for the scope of Fed authority. We argue that judicial review of Fed rulemaking may be necessary, and is at least consistent with, our borrowing-power rationale, and we say that review is normatively desirable. 11/12

In modern macroeconomics, independent central banks, not court-enforced promises, are what enables affordable sovereign borrowing. Thus we argue that Fed power over money is a necessary & proper implementation of the borrowing power. 10/12

Yet time and again, creditors efforts to hold Congress to its word in court have failed, as the Court finally admitted in 1935. Not coincidentally, major reforms of the Fed followed a few months later. 9/12

That basis is the borrowing power, along with the Public Debt Clause of the 14th Am. We show that, as the Court has recognized, the borrowing power requires that Congress be able to make credible commitments not to renege on its promises to creditors. 8/12

We also try to argue, though, that the Court has some ways to avoid confronting the hard policy implications of originalism. That is, there is indeed a constitutional basis for money powers and an independent Fed that an originalist could accept. 7/12

Of course, one take from that conclusion is that originalism is a silly way to run a government. In the 18th Century, no one really knew much about monetary policy. It seems crazy to try to reshape our economy to fit their limited understanding. 6/12

That is, we agreed with Tucker and others that the framers may well have meant to restrict paper money, and the Court’s current doctrine on independent agencies is evolving rapidly. This creates both legal and political jeopardy for the Fed. 5/12